<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (12) TMI 1867 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469752</link>
    <description>A rectification application cannot be used to reopen a concluded issue where the record already shows an uncontroverted submission that credit was reversed. The Tribunal found no material to show that reversal had not occurred, so the alleged omission to direct verification of reversal was not a rectifiable mistake. The earlier order was sustained on the existing record, and the rectification attempt was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2026 20:38:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=909742" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1867 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469752</link>
      <description>A rectification application cannot be used to reopen a concluded issue where the record already shows an uncontroverted submission that credit was reversed. The Tribunal found no material to show that reversal had not occurred, so the alleged omission to direct verification of reversal was not a rectifiable mistake. The earlier order was sustained on the existing record, and the rectification attempt was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>